224 



COPYRIGHT. 



work, with provision for a second term of four- 

 teen years if the sculptor be living at the end 

 of the first. 



One of the first questions considered by the 

 Commissioners, and on which much testimony 

 was taken, was whether the royalty system 

 should be substituted for the copyright laws. 

 This system may be briefly described as one 

 under which the author of a work of literature 

 or art, or his assignee, would not have the ex- 

 clusive right of publication, but any person 

 would be entitled to copy or republish the 

 work on paying or securing to the owner a 

 remuneration, taking the form of a royalty or 

 definite sum prescribed by law, payable to the 

 owner for each copy published. The principal 

 reason urged for the adoption of the royalty 

 system is the benefit which it is supposed 

 would arise to the public from the early pub- 

 lication of cheap editions, as the original pub- 

 lisher would be compelled to issue cheap edi- 

 tions from the start, or this would be done by 

 rival publishers. The opponents of the system 

 say that, where one book pays the publisher 

 for his outlay and. risk, many are complete 

 failures and never pay even the cost of pub- 

 lishing; that if the royalty system were es- 

 tablished, no publisher would take the risk of 

 the first publication, knowing that if the work 

 proved successful he would immediately have 

 his reward snatched from him by the numer- 

 ous publishers who would republish and under- 

 sell him ; that it would be impossible for pub- 

 lishers to remunerate authors at the rate they 

 now do, who would therefore often be deterred 

 from writing ; and that many works, especially 

 those involving long preparation and great 

 cost to the author or publisher, which would be 

 published under the present system, could nev- 

 er be brought out, on account of the increased 

 risk that would ensue from the royalty system. 

 Among those who opposed this system were 

 Herbert Spencer, Professor Huxley, Profes- 

 sor Tyndall, and other well-known authors. 

 Among other reasons urged against it was the 

 fact that it has not been adopted in any coun- 

 try, except in a modified form in Italy. 



The Commissioners reported against the roy- 

 alty system, and recommended that the various 

 statutes relating to copyright be consolidated 

 into one uniform law. They suggest that the 

 duration of copyright in books be during the 

 life of the author and for thirty years after his 

 death ; that the term of protection for other 

 works (except photographs) be the same as 

 that for books; and that the exclusive right 

 of representing dramatic and musical composi- 

 tions be secured for a like period. This will 

 amount to a material extension of the term of 

 copyright in Great Britain, and will make the 

 period of protection considerably longer than 

 it is in the United States, where copyright is 

 secured for twenty-eight years, with provi- 

 sion for a renewed term of fourteen years in 

 favor of the author or his family. In France, 

 Spain, Portugal, and Russia, copyright is grant- 



ed for the life of the author and fifty years 

 after his death ; in Germany, for life and 

 thirty years ; in Belgium and Holland, for life 

 and twenty years ; in Italy, for life and forty 

 years, with a second term of forty years, dur- 

 ing which other persons than the proprietor 

 may publish on payment of a royalty. It will 

 be seen, therefore, that the English Commis- 

 sioners preferred the term adopted in Ger- 

 many. 



By a law passed in 1775, perpetual copyright 

 in books given or bequeathed to them was 

 granted to certain universities and colleges. 

 It is now recommended that this privilege be 

 abolished. Authors and publishers have com- 

 plained of the heavy and unjust tax imposed 

 upon them by the statute requiring the free 

 delivery of a copy of every book published to 

 certain libraries. The number of copies re- 

 quired to be delivered has varied at different 

 times. It was nine under the statute of 1710, 

 and eleven under that of 1801. It was reduced 

 to five in 1836, at which number it has since 

 continued. The libraries which now enjoy 

 these privileges are the British Museum, the 

 Bodleian Library at Oxford, the Public Library 

 at Cambridge, the library of the Faculty of 

 Advocates at Edinburgh, and the library of 

 Trinity College, Dublin. The delivery to the 

 British Museum is peremptory, but not to the 

 other colleges unless a demand in writing is 

 made by them. The Commissioners consider 

 the complaints of authors and publishers on 

 this point to be well founded, and recommend 

 that the law be repealed except in the case of 

 the British Museum. 



Among the most important questions con- 

 sidered by the Commission were those relat- 

 ing to the unlicensed abridgment and drama- 

 tization of copyrighted works. In regard to 

 abridgments, the law is not settled ; but the 

 dicta of the courts lean to the doctrine that a 

 fair and bonafide abridgment of a copyrighted 

 book is not piratical. The Commissioners say 

 that " even though an abridgment be so framed 

 as to escape being a piracy, still it is capable 

 of doing great harm to the author of the origi- 

 nal work by interfering with his market ; and 

 it is the more likely to interfere with that 

 market and injure the sale of the original work 

 if, as is frequently the case, it bears in its title 

 the name of the original author. We think 

 this should be prevented, and, upon the whole, 

 we recommend that no abridgments of copy- 

 right works should be allowed during the term 

 of copyright, without the consent of the owner 

 of the copyright." The statutes are silent con- 

 cerning the dramatization of novels and other 

 literary works. They neither provide for re- 

 serving the right to the author nor expressly 

 prohibit unauthorized dramatizations. The law 

 has been settled by the courts that it is piracy 

 to publish without authority a dramatization 

 of a novel. But what authors have most suf- 

 fered from is the unlicensed dramatization of 

 their novels for public performance. Accord- 



